Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd
like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our
other members.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you are a member in good standing, then you can navigate to the 2015 Miami Dolphins Media Guide from the navigation bar at the top of the forums. Also, in the sticky section of the main forum, there is a link to vote on your top 50 dolphins players of all time.

So, now what? We are now complaining that they are searching people who go to the inaugural event? The security every other President has enjoyed is not extended to this one? Why not?
That stupidity goes along with complaining about Obama's kids possibly having a security detail.

The 4th amendment? Unreasonable searches? So a President who is under constant threat of assassination should not have any searches of people going to his inaugural event? Honestly, I don't think you have any clue about our Constitution at all and why some of these amendments are in there.

I come to the point to think that you actually want another Reagan or Kennedy event.

You don't even have to support this President to realize the idiocy behind your thinking that anybody going to the inaugural event of the President has to be searched. What you are doing is utter hatred.

And another post full of hatred and very little substance:

Gas goes up because that's what your energy companies do. Not because of a certain President or economic times.
In this chart you can see that prices go up and down, up and down. It has yet to reach the height of Bush's term though.http://www.GasBuddy.com/gb_retail_pr...me=96&units=us

Then we have the issue of taxes. No taxes go up. Or have gone up or are higher than before Obama took office. The only "increase" is the payroll tax which was a 2-year temporary reduction enacted in 2009 by Congress. It was always supposed to go back to its original value regardless who would be President. You failed again!

And your last failure is our beloved/hated USPS. The USPS is an independent agency of the US government and has received no funding since the 80s. And since it is technically still a government agency (but run like a private business) the Bush administration had Congress enact a new PAEA in 2006 in which the USPS has to send all its profits into a 75 year prepaid health retirement fund. 75 years prepaid and not allowed to make a profit. The cost: 500 Billion over 8 years. The amount of the prepaid fund is almost equal to the debt load now. And please understand the prepaid fund has nothing to do with paying current benefits to retirees. The USPS never had a payment problem.
They have every right to increase their stamp rate. Nobody screamed bloody murder when a Republican House and a Republican Senate voted and ratified a bill which made it impossible for the USPS ever to make a profit again. It was signed in December 06, one month before the house changed into democratic hands. And then it was signed by a Republican President.
1 cent? If you send 100 letters every month your extra cost are: $1!!!!!!!!
Have you tried to send a letter through alternative ways (FedEx, UPS etc). The 46 cents sound much better right?

Failed.
This thread is a failure.

"Politics is the Art of Looking for Trouble, Finding it Everywhere, Diagnosing it Incorrectly, and Applying the Wrong Remedies"

So, now what? We are now complaining that they are searching people who go to the inaugural event? The security every other President has enjoyed is not extended to this one? Why not?
That stupidity goes along with complaining about Obama's kids possibly having a security detail.

The 4th amendment? Unreasonable searches? So a President who is under constant threat of assassination should not have any searches of people going to his inaugural event? Honestly, I don't think you have any clue about our Constitution at all and why some of these amendments are in there.

If we treated the TSA presence as an isolated incident, with no consideration of what is happening in this country, then you would be right. It's not really that big of a deal.

On top of all the crazy surveillance (possible due to the Patriot Act), there's also the National Defense Authorization Act, and H.R. 347. If not for public awareness, SOPA would also be a reality. The Fairness Doctrine is another idea that has also been tossed around by congress. But you're right, there's nothing to worry about.

Originally Posted by phins_4_ever

I come to the point to think that you actually want another Reagan or Kennedy event.

You don't even have to support this President to realize the idiocy behind your thinking that anybody going to the inaugural event of the President has to be searched. What you are doing is utter hatred.

There's this misconception that conservatives are just trying to spread fear because, for whatever reason, they hate Obama. Here's a fun little fact, when the Patriot Act was extended in 2009, the Democrat vote was split approx. 50/50. The Republican vote, however, was overwhelmingly in favor of the extension ( something like 4:1 in favor of extending the bill). Obama is only part of the problem. I don't care where you stand politically, we all have reason to worry. I'd encourage everyone watch (or listen to) the 2nd video I just posted. Ignore the fact that this was a lecture at a socialism conference.

If we treated the TSA presence as an isolated incident, with no consideration of what is happening in this country, then you would be right. It's not really that big of a deal.

I skip the rest of your post and focus only on this one sentence.

I have in the past, and continue to do so, criticized the TSA. As a matter of fact in my opinion it is a waste of money, resources, time and yes in some instances infringes on the 4th amendment. I know because I refused to be searched by the TSA because there were no grounds for it. The TSA employs people who would probably not get a job somewhere else or would just push shifts as a security guard in the middle of the night on some parking lot. It is nothing else but a big work program and does very little for security.

If you asked me I rather dismantle TSA and Homeland security today instead of tomorrow.

My issue is that this is a video about a presidential inauguration event which always had security and since the inception of the TSA probably done by the TSA. Before that it was just another security company or government organization. It was never before considered a violation of the 4th but now.

If anybody wants to trash the TSA I am all the way with them but put forth videos where the 4th Amendment is really trampled not at an event which always had searches. And considering the threat a President is under I consider these searches warranted.

Heck, in regards to your first video I put some pics up a while ago about cameras being installed everywhere in Florida. I am no dummy. I know that some of our rights are being trampled on in the name of national security. But instead of whining and acting like an internet commando I do something about it.

This thread is a failure because it is trying to make an argument where there should be no argument. There are so many examples to post from where you can show violations of the 4th amendment but they choose to argue a moment when there should be no argument. Obama did not invent the security at the presidential Inauguration, neither did Bush, nor did Clinton. It was always there.

What does Viagra has to do with this thread? If you want to continue with the Viagra discussion just post in that particular thread. It will pop back up (pun intended) to the top.

Right now you look like poster with no answers trying to hide behind an old thread I have already forgotten about. Is that Viagra thing hanging (pun intended) in your head this whole time? And you had no relief yet (pun intended)?

What does Viagra has to do with this thread? If you want to continue with the Viagra discussion just post in that particular thread. It will pop back up (pun intended) to the top.

Right now you look like poster with no answers trying to hide behind an old thread I have already forgotten about. Is that Viagra thing hanging (pun intended) in your head this whole time? And you had no relief yet (pun intended)?

You are a funny poster.

Just curious how someone posted a link, questioning the veracity of my statement, when the link you posted verified my statement. You saying a post or a thread fails is quite like the pot calling the kettle black.